190
This is literally me I do this (hexbear.net)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net
252 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 26 points 2 years ago (17 children)

Because in their times there were still competing imperial powers. There wasnt unipolarity at the time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (16 children)

    see I’m gonna trust lenin and marx over a yale and colombia professor who only has ties to the british. zero ML countries adhere to world-systems theory and for good reasons

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 27 points 2 years ago (14 children)

    Cuba and the DPRK dont see the United States as an imperial hegemon?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (13 children)

    I don’t think either call it hegemonism that’s a chinese thing and even then there’s a big leap going from hegemonism to imperial core

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 20 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    So what is the view of imperialism in ML countries and how does it contradicr?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    depends country to country at different points in time. obviously first i’d have to ask who’s side you were on in the sino-soviet split just as a baseline. or to go further, whether or not you support stalin’s decision to recognize and send aid to israel when it declared independence

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 14 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    Im not sure where i stand on those things need to read more. Just want to know where those countries stand today and how it contradicts the concept of an "imperial core"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    the countries don’t exactly deliver press releases saying what imperialism is usually they just say “down with yankee imperialism”. do you want something like a curriculum on how the subject is taught in school? how these countries actually act?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 19 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    Well you said they dont world systems theory so i assumed you had evidence of that. Saying "down with yankee imperialism" is hardly contradictory. They might not literally read Wallerstein but if youre going to deny his development of theory and its applicability to modern conditions (that Marx and Lenin never observed) based on what you think the DPRK and Cuba think about it i would assume youd have something more solid.

    Che said that the United States is the belly of the beast. That certainly seems in line.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    the onus is not on my proving they don’t follow some esoteric sociological theory of a foreign professor but on you to prove that they do. and no che using poetic license is not proof of a communist country following a hundreds of page long dissertation. next you’ll say iran follows it too since it says israel little satan and america big satan

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 18 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    I literally said that they may not read Wallerstein. The point is that the broad strokes are not contradictory to the concept of an imperial core existing. I was looking for ideas that actually materially contradict here. Honestly, i dont think you need to follow all of Wallerstein to use the term imperial core. If its useful for describing the current geopolitical situation, which i think it is, then its useful.

    Honestly this all just seems like a nitpick to throw me off base. None of it contradicts my core points.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    marxism isn’t about what feels useful and isn’t about what’s geopolitically common sense from your perspective. if you oppose communists overthrowing the government in my country and support the demsocs who want to continue capitalist relations and exploitation I don’t consider you a comrade in the same struggle, to put it as simply as possible

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 10 points 2 years ago

    When did i say anything about opposing communists overthrowing them lol? I support them against the west, not against communists. Youre reading things in that arent there, perhaps because of prior experiance?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent